These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

118 related items for PubMed ID: 20830880

  • 1. Root treatment in vivo with a new rotary periodontal instrument: a profilometer study.
    Keogh TP, Sanz Alonso M, Arias de Luxán J, Navarrete López J.
    Quintessence Int; 1993 Dec; 24(12):853-60. PubMed ID: 20830880
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Comparative effectiveness of hand and ultrasonic instrumentations in root surface planing in vitro.
    Khosravi M, Bahrami ZS, Atabaki MS, Shokrgozar MA, Shokri F.
    J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Mar; 31(3):160-5. PubMed ID: 15016018
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Evaluation of root surface microtopography following the use of four instrumentation systems by confocal microscopy and scanning electron microscopy: an in vitro study.
    Solís Moreno C, Santos A, Nart J, Levi P, Velásquez A, Sanz Moliner J.
    J Periodontal Res; 2012 Oct; 47(5):608-15. PubMed ID: 22494068
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Root surface removal and resultant surface texture with diamond-coated ultrasonic inserts: an in vitro and SEM study.
    Vastardis S, Yukna RA, Rice DA, Mercante D.
    J Clin Periodontol; 2005 May; 32(5):467-73. PubMed ID: 15842261
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Clinical evaluation of the speed and effectiveness of subgingival calculus removal on single-rooted teeth with diamond-coated ultrasonic tips.
    Yukna RA, Scott JB, Aichelmann-Reidy ME, LeBlanc DM, Mayer ET.
    J Periodontol; 1997 May; 68(5):436-42. PubMed ID: 9182738
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Comparison of the effectiveness of scaling and root planing in vivo using hand vs rotary instruments.
    Dibart S, Capri D, Casavecchia P, Nunn M, Skobe Z.
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2004 Aug; 24(4):370-7. PubMed ID: 15446407
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Root instrumentation. Power-driven versus manual scalers, which one?
    Drisko CH.
    Dent Clin North Am; 1998 Apr; 42(2):229-44. PubMed ID: 9597335
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Comparative clinical responses related to the use of various periodontal instrumentation.
    Obeid PR, D'Hoore W, Bercy P.
    J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Mar; 31(3):193-9. PubMed ID: 15016023
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. The effects of EDTA gel conditioning exposure time on periodontitis-affected human root surfaces: surface topography and PDL cell adhesion.
    Gamal AY, Mailhot JM.
    J Int Acad Periodontol; 2003 Jan; 5(1):11-22. PubMed ID: 12666951
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Comparison of the effects of various periodontal rotary instruments on surface characteristics of root surface.
    Kishida M, Sato S, Ito K.
    J Oral Sci; 2004 Mar; 46(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 15141717
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Comparison of the effects of periodontal rotary instruments and Gracey curettes on root surface characteristics: an in vivo SEM study.
    Dwivedi S, Verma SJ.
    Quintessence Int; 2012 Mar; 43(10):e135-40. PubMed ID: 23115772
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. A comparative study between different techniques in non-surgical periodontal treatment.
    Forabosco A, Spinato S, Grandi T, Prini M.
    Minerva Stomatol; 2006 May; 55(5):289-96. PubMed ID: 16688105
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. A comparison of root surface instrumentation using two piezoelectric ultrasonic scalers and a hand scaler in vivo.
    Kawashima H, Sato S, Kishida M, Ito K.
    J Periodontal Res; 2007 Feb; 42(1):90-5. PubMed ID: 17214645
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. In vivo effects of an Er:YAG laser, an ultrasonic system and scaling and root planing on the biocompatibility of periodontally diseased root surfaces in cultures of human PDL fibroblasts.
    Schwarz F, Aoki A, Sculean A, Georg T, Scherbaum W, Becker J.
    Lasers Surg Med; 2003 Feb; 33(2):140-7. PubMed ID: 12913887
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. A comparison of root surface instrumentation using manual, ultrasonic and rotary instruments: an in vitro study using scanning electron microscopy.
    Marda P, Prakash S, Devaraj CG, Vastardis S.
    Indian J Dent Res; 2012 Feb; 23(2):164-70. PubMed ID: 22945704
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Histological and profilometric evaluation of the root surface after instrumentation with a new piezoelectric device - ex vivo study.
    Silva D, Martins O, Matos S, Lopes P, Rolo T, Baptista I.
    Int J Dent Hyg; 2015 May; 13(2):138-44. PubMed ID: 24995862
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. The effectiveness of scaling and root planing with curets designed for deep pockets.
    Nagy RJ, Otomo-Corgel J, Stambaugh R.
    J Periodontol; 1992 Dec; 63(12):954-9. PubMed ID: 1474467
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Non-surgical periodontal treatment with a new ultrasonic device (Vector-ultrasonic system) or hand instruments.
    Sculean A, Schwarz F, Berakdar M, Romanos GE, Brecx M, Willershausen B, Becker J.
    J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Jun; 31(6):428-33. PubMed ID: 15142210
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. In vivo and in vitro effects of an Er:YAG laser, a GaAlAs diode laser, and scaling and root planing on periodontally diseased root surfaces: a comparative histologic study.
    Schwarz F, Sculean A, Berakdar M, Szathmari L, Georg T, Becker J.
    Lasers Surg Med; 2003 Jun; 32(5):359-66. PubMed ID: 12766958
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Effect on pocket depth and attachment level of manual versus ultrasonic scaling of lower second molars following lower third molar extraction: a randomized controlled trial.
    Pons-Vicente O, Valmaseda-Castellón E, Berini-Aytés L, Gay-Escoda C.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Mar; 107(3):e11-9. PubMed ID: 19217008
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 6.